Kingland West Clearing 1,123 Acres at FM1010 and Grand Parkway, Using Old Flood Maps

Contractors have begun clearing more than 1,100 acres owned by CH-B Kingland, LLC, north of the newly opened Grand Parkway. Construction plans obtained from Harris County Flood Control District via a FOIA request indicate the developer will build single-family residences. But the documents also indicate that engineers are using pre- not post-Harvey floodplain maps and data. That could be tragic news for unknowledgeable home buyers as well as homeowners already in the area. I have interviewed people near here whose homes flooded twice in the last five years.

While the current maps date back to Tropical Storm Allison, they are still official. But why?

Background on Land and Developer

To date, the plans include four sections of a subdivision called “The Trails.” According to a drainage impact analysis submitted to obtain permits, The Trails will be part of a larger development called Kingland West.

Kingland West clearing
Land being cleared for The Trails, part of Kingland West.

Kingland West was once part of 8,000 acres owned by CH-B Kingland along the then-undeveloped northeastern section of the Grand Parkway. But CH-B Kingland sold 4,000 acres to neighboring Colony Ridge in 2016.

The remaining 4,000 acres span three counties: Montgomery, Harris and Liberty. According to Appraisal District maps in the three counties, CH-B Kingland still owns acreage on both sides of the Grand Parkway. The opening of Segment H of the Grand Parkway will likely help the value of CH-B’s remaining land skyrocket – despite the fact that wetlands pockmark the land.

Looking east along the Grand Parkway at additional land owned by CH-B Kingland not yet being developed. This is immediately east of Kingland West in Liberty County and not part of Kingland West construction plans.

A group called Castle Hill Partners appears on construction plans. Castle Hill Partners (CHP) is a private investment firm specializing in commercial development. The company provides turnkey investment, construction, loan servicing and property management services.

Effect on Flooding

Of Montgomery, Harris, and Liberty counties, Harris has the most stringent flood regulations. And according to a source close to the engineering company (Jones & Carter), Harris refused to permit the plans unless the engineering company followed Harris’ standards in all three counties. That part is good. The summary of floodwater detention below shows that the developer meets Harris County standards.

Screen capture from Kingland West construction plans.

The bad news: based on the engineer’s assurances, HCFCD did not check and verify all the engineer’s calculations.

Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan

Here is a summary of their Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. It declares, in writing, that all outfall structures will be constructed in accordance with Harris County standards. The Plan also describes measures contractors should use to prevent sediment from escaping the site.

Using Old Sand Pit for Detention Basin

The developer apparently plans to use an old sand pit for floodwater detention. Compare the location on the map in the previous link with the satellite image below.

Location of sand pits matches location of detention pond in Kingland plans. Satellite photo from 12/21.

When I last photographed these pits in June 2020, they had mostly dry bottoms. But the image above shows they now have wet bottoms. I hope there’s enough room in the ponds to hold the required amount of floodwater.

Helicopter photo from 6/20, eighteen months ago. Note small ponds already holding water in pits. Water table is high because of proximity to San Jacinto East Fork.

Contractors will make more room for floodwater with additional excavation adjacent to the ponds. Here’s where the engineers plan to move fill from and to in Phase 1. But there’s still a big problem – the size of floodplains on the maps being used.

Built to Pre-Harvey, Pre-Colony-Ridge Floodplain Standards

As regular readers know, NOAA developed new rainfall probability statistics after Harvey. In the northern part of Harris County, they’re about 40% higher than pre-Harvey.

Unfortunately, the developer is using old flood maps and data developed after Tropical Storm Allison, not after Harvey.

See the disclaimer in the screen capture below. It appears in small type on virtually every page of the construction plans.

Screen capture from The Trails construction documents explains all calculations are based on old flood maps and pre-Harvey data.

Rosemary Fain and her husband who live just blocks south and east of Kingland West might disagree with that statement about “rare occasions.” Despite being farther from the East Fork than every Kingland West home will be, the Fains flooded twice recently from the East Fork, once during Harvey and again during Imelda. Water rose so high that it bridged out of the East Fork Watershed and started flowing into Luce Bayou – miles to the east!

I saw no reference to current floodplains or recent floods in the plans.

However, more than outdated rainfall-probability statistics affect flooding in this area. Just ask the people of Plum Grove, many of whom never flooded before Colony Ridge.

The sad fact is that the massive 20,000-acre Colony Ridge development in Liberty County, immediately east and north of Kingland, has increased and accelerated drainage. Colony Ridge has ALSO made the 2007 flood maps woefully out of date; the development started after the the old maps’ release – around 2012. Their out-of-control drainage blew out FM1010 less than 2 miles north of Kingland.

So why hasn’t MAAPnext released the new maps yet? They’re reportedly complete. More on that in a future post.

Posted by Bob Rehak on July 29, 2022

1795 Days since Hurricane Harvey

The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.

Construction of Northeast Water Purification Plant Past Halfway Mark

The City of Houston’s new $2 billion Northeast Water Purification Plant between Lake Houston and Beltway 8 East is now more than 50% complete. The last monthly progress report posted on GreaterHoustonWater.com was from more than a year ago. At the time, it showed construction 55% complete. Since then, the City has continued to post detailed periodic construction updates. The latest was in March 2022. It featured 79 pages of photos that dramatize the complexity of such a huge project. A flyover of the plant on 7/22/22 showed even more progress.

The latest timetable shows completion of the first phase early next year and completion of the second in 2025.

Project Benefits

The plant will provide enough treated surface water to reduce subsidence, which causes much of our flooding problems according to the City of Houston and the Harris-Galveston Subsidence District.

The Harris-Galveston Subsidence District says that land subsidence is caused by the withdrawal of groundwater. For that reason, regulations have been put in place to limit the use of groundwater.

By 2025, surface water must supply at least 60 percent of our water. The plant should meet that objective. And, it will wean 80% of the region off groundwater by 2035.

The plant expansion will supply 320 million gallons per day of treated water capacity in addition to the current 80 million gallons per day. So, capacity will quintuple by completion.

Then and Now Pictures Show Progress


The last time I posted about this project, construction was kicking into high gear back in September of 2020. Below are five pairs of photos from then and now that show how far it has come.

intake plant
September 2020
July 2022

The two pipelines leading to the Northeast Water Purification Plant are each 9 feet tall!


Northeast Water Treatment Plant
September 2020. Looking west toward Beltway.
July 2022

September 2020
July 2022

September 2020
July 2022

Improved Techniques

According to the City, “The expansion will include conventional treatment processes like the existing plant that help coagulate, settle, filter, and then disinfect water.” Quality will exceed Texas Commission on Environmental Quality requirements. 

In addition, says the City, an advanced oxidation process called ozonation will disinfect water to help ensure that harmful organisms such as Giardia and Cryptosporidium are eliminated. Ozonation also helps eliminate taste and odor causing compounds, which improves the aesthetic quality of the water supplied by the Northeast Water Purification Plant.

Posted by Bob Rehak on July 28, 2022

1794 Days since Hurricane Harvey

The Hand of Sand Miners on the San Jacinto

The hand of sand miners weighs heavily on the San Jacinto watershed. Not all miners. But many.

While exploring the river basin by helicopter last week, the contrast between two scenes struck me: 1) The natural blanket of green in Lake Houston Wilderness Park. 2) Sand mines that lined the banks of the East and West Forks for miles.

The trees and natural wetlands inhibit floods. They slow floodwaters down, hold them back during heavy rains, and reduce erosion. The sand mines do not. They may provide some floodwater detention, but the pits are often filled to the brim and their dikes often break.

How you treat the land determines how it treats you. Especially during floods. This aerial photo essay shows how the San Jacinto River Basin used to look and how it looks today.

Lake Houston Wilderness Park

Peach and Caney Creeks border Lake Houston Wilderness Park on the west. The San Jacinto East Fork borders it on the east. The shot below represents the way the whole Lake Houston area used to be.

Looking across the 5000 acres of Lake Houston Wilderness Park – the largest urban nature park in America.

Compare That With These Shots

This first provides a direct comparison.

Sand mine on Caney Creek. Lake Houston Wilderness Park in upper right.

Below, note the difference in water levels between the creek and mine. No doubt, you also noticed a difference in water color. That bright blue/green in the mine water likely comes from high chloride levels.

Site of previous breach from mine into Caney Creek, the subject of a million-dollar lawsuit by the TCEQ and the Texas Attorney General.

More Mine Photos from West Fork

I’ll provide five more shots here, all from the West Fork San Jacinto. They represent more than 500 similar shots I took on 7/22/22.

No Swimming

When I see all this environmental degradation, my mind starts swimming – despite the scary water.

  • How much sediment gets swept downstream in floods?
  • Can this land ever return to productive use?
  • Do other cities allow mining in urban environments upstream from their water sources?
  • What effect does mining have on the water quality in Lake Houston?
  • What percentage of our water bills goes to cleaning up this water?
  • Why doesn’t Texas have performance bonds that ensure sand miners leave the land in habitable shape?

The sand makes concrete. It supports growth. But is all growth good?

  • Is growth in one area at the expense of public safety in another worthwhile?
  • Should we limit the concentration of mines in an area?
  • Why do mines expect the public to pay their cleanup and reclamation costs?
  • Is it safe to build mines below a dam that releases enough water during floods to break the mines’ dikes?
  • Are there no alternatives?

Cycle Continues

New Segment H of the Grand Parkway cutting east through forests will attract more subdivisions that require more sand for more concrete.

I encourage rebuttals from any mine owner who wishes to address these questions.

Posted by Bob Rehak on July 27, 2022

1793 Days since Hurricane Harvey

The thoughts expressed in this post represent opinions on matters of public concern and safety. They are protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and the Anti-SLAPP Statute of the Great State of Texas.